Subject:
|
Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 23 Jan 2000 08:27:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
607 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> One thing I did think was that all these quiet and circumspect people are
> likely to be more like timebombs than models of reserve -- but I suppose it
> depends upon one's experience with such things. Me, I like to vent the steam
> as I go rather then let it just build up over time.
I disagree with the assertion that human psychology is a such a linear process.
One person may read a post and think "this writer is deluded, and clearly
wrong on points A, C, and D", someone else may read the same post and think
"what a (bleeping) idiot". By using such words commonly, the latter person is
entering a self-reinforcing condition where the percieved emotion behind the
words is effecting their emotional state.
Or in sound-bite form: thinking using rational words leads to rational
thoughts, thinking using angry words leads to angry thoughts.
ObDisClam: This is clearly a gross simplification, so please consider the
meaning behind the words, rather than whatever words I used this early on a
sunday morning! :)
> And I have no interest in protecting children from realities like foul
> language, violence, sexual content, or what have you. Again, from my view,
> this does central damage to children raised with unrealistic expectations of
> what is indeed out there in the world. Here on the internet they at least
> have the option to turn away, or scroll down, or whatever...
I agree that 'protecting children' is a problematic argument, but it might be
more apt to consider protecting adults from swearing. Because without the
consent of parents and/or teachers, LUGNET isn't going to see that many
children.
It isn't about whether it is right or wrong to swear, whether it should be
socially acceptable or not - it's entirely not about that at all, like it or
not - it's about what other people think and making LUGNET the least offensive
to everyone. There are other platforms where you can campaign that people
should be free to express themselves however they want using language. IMO
LUGNET is not one of those.
It's on the same lines as touting religion, morals and political beliefs (!),
and it has as much place in LEGO discussion as those do. (1)
> So, you essentially allowed these people to become the de facto arbiters of
> what kind of speech was and was not allowed on Lugnet...is this right? So all
> of us monitor our speech for the sake of a known minority, and not you
> yourself? A minority that always had the ability to just not read a certain
> poster's offerings? A minority that still has this same ability?
Strong words are to flame wars what flicked cigarettes are to forest fires.
Richard
1 - Whether that means swearing should be tolerated in .off-topic is another
.debate
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
| (...) That's it, yes! And because of the tenets which hold that... 1) people give their real-life name rather than posting anonymously, and 2) people avoid the use of obseneties/profanities/etc., ...LUGNET is a much more friendly, much less (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
| Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) it (...) steam (...) process. (...) Whatever happened to Mad Hatter? (...) or (...) offensive (...) (!), (...) So, we are in the right group now? I agree that people ought to be decent on Lugnet and RTL. I (...) (25 years ago, 29-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
| (...) Terms like "bad taste" are extremely subjective, and to my mind have no real meaning although I understand the gist of what you are saying -- really its more of a simple put down than anything else. And by "ignorance" I thought the original (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
50 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
